Norwich City Council Home Energy Conservation Report 2019 2021
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Norwich City Council
Home Energy
Conservation Report 2019
- 2021
Section 1 - Foreword: Reducing energy use has important environmental, social and economic benefits and therefore clearly contributes to Norwich city council’s corporate priorities. It also helps to meet both national and international targets to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. Increasing the energy efficiency of homes can also work to reduce fuel poverty. Over recent years steep increases in fuel prices have, in part, resulted in a rise in fuel poverty nationally and so emphasise the importance of reducing the impact of this issue locally. The council has been working hard to try to combat fuel poverty across the city and to mitigate the effects of fuel poverty wherever possible. While fuel poverty has not increased since 2011, we have seen an increase from 2015-2016, due to rising fuel prices and decreasing central government support for home energy efficiency improvements. Clearly there is still more to do. There appears to be a disconnect between the government’s ambition to improve the energy efficiency of all fuel-poor homes to a decent band C level and the amount of money being spent on the issue. However, as government funding has dwindled over time we continue to work tirelessly to pursue alternative funding options to enable us to continue to deliver this important work and ultimately to reduce fuel poverty in Norwich. We must, however, remain realistic in our aspirations with what we can deliver with decreased resources. The reduction of fuel poverty is vital to improve the health of the local community, enhance prosperity and improve the housing stock. Our programme of activities will, we hope, be assisted by a combination of government funding, other ad hoc funding schemes and our own funding. We will continue to work to improve the housing stock in Norwich (both private and social), in order to increase energy efficiency across Norwich. Since the introduction of the Home Energy Conservation Act we have run a wide range of programmes and projects to promote energy efficiency to our residents. This report outlines how we will continue to develop this work over the next two years. Add Portfolio Holder for Social Inclusion (Picture)
2 - Executive Summary: Aim: The Home Energy Conservation Act 1995 (HECA) recognises that local authorities are well placed to use their position to seek to improve the energy efficiency of residential accommodation within their local communities. HECA updates are required bi-annually and this report provides an update on the work undertaken since the publication of Norwich City Council’s 2017 HECA report. This HECA report is written in accordance with the HECA guidance published by the Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (DBEIS) in January 2019, titled: Guidance to English Energy Conservation Authorities issued pursuant to the Home Energy Conservation Act 1995. The full report submitted to DBEIS can be found in Appendix I. Structure of the report: Firstly the report considers the age and condition of the city’s housing stock, both privately and council owned. Section 6 considers carbon emissions and energy consumption in the city, before moving to review Fuel Poverty levels and an exploration of the complex factors which make pinpointing causes of fuel poverty challenging in different areas of the city in Section 7. Section 8 reports the various initiatives that the council has undertaken to help reduce both carbon emissions and fuel poverty across Norwich. The report concludes by considering progress against actions set over the past 4 years and finishes by detailing future plans to continue to reduce fuel poverty and carbon emissions in Norwich, alongside the need to be realistic in our aspirations in financially challenging times.
Contents 1 – Foreword p.5 2 – Executive Summary p.6 3 – Introduction p.8 4 – Strategic Framework p.9 5 – Current position in Norwich p.10-14 6 – CO2 emissions from across the city p.15-24 7 – Fuel poverty p.25-36 8– Council initiatives – what are we doing? p.37-54 • energy efficiency measures • warm and well • cheaper energy tariffs • smart meters • partnership working • renewable energy • the council’s carbon footprint • council stock • private sector housing 9 – What did we achieve? Update on 2017 actions p.55-68 10 – Future actions – 2019 and beyond p.69 11 – Appendix I - Submission to DBEIS p.70-78 12 – Appendix II – Integrated Impact Assessment p.79+
Section 3 - Introduction: Norwich city council is responsible for approximately 60% of the urban area of greater Norwich, including the historic city centre and a population of approximately 140,400 residents. Norwich is an innovative, creative and vibrant city, with big ambitions for both the place and the people who live here. The first UNESCO City of Literature in England, Norwich is flourishing. It is home to the headquarters of many global companies, in the top thirteen shopping destinations in the country and is the regional employment and cultural capital. Its economic, social cultural and environmental influence is out of all proportion to its size, and extends far beyond its boundaries. However, Norwich is a ‘tale of two cities’. Whilst the city has many positive features, it nevertheless experiences many of the tough challenges that urban centres can suffer. A significant proportion of city residents suffer deprivation, poor educational attainment and poor health. Norwich is also a growing city, which puts demands on ever diminishing public sector resources, both now and in the future. A significant proportion of Norwich residents have low-literacy levels and are lacking basic digital skills or internet access. All of which can impede access to some of the most competitive deals on a range of products from car insurance, mobile telephones and energy tariffs. The impact of financial recession and welfare reforms has only served to increase the challenges for disadvantaged residents. Our new corporate priorities include ‘People living well’, which includes a commitment to ‘build on progress made over recent years in tackling fuel poverty in the city’. Under the priority ‘Great neighbourhoods, housing and environment’ we looking to ‘ensure our services mitigate against any adverse effects of climate change and are efficient to reduce carbon emissions’ and ‘improve the quality and safety of private sector housing’. This HECA report provides a framework to bring together in one document a number of housing improvement activities which will help to reduce fuel poverty, improve health and increase the energy efficiency of city homes. 12.3% of all Norwich households still live in fuel poverty, which equates to over 7,800 households. In the past 7 years we have experienced a credit crunch, a global recession, an extended period of limited economic growth and, for many, a stagnation of wages, resulting in a failure for wages to keep up with cost of living increases. The Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy requires all English authorities to prepare an update on HECA reports by 31 March 2019, setting out the energy conservation measures that the authority considers practical, cost- effective and likely to result in significant improvements in the energy efficiency of residential accommodation in the city.
This report will be a living document and will be updated as we continue our work to
improve the energy efficiency of residential accommodation in Norwich over the
coming months and years.
Section 4 - Strategic framework:
The diagram below sets out how the HECA reports fit in with other key strategies,
policies and plans:
Strategic framework for HECA report
Vision and Corporate plan
Priorities for
the Council
Environmental Environmental
Policy strategy
Affordable Affordable Housing
Warmth warmth strategy
strategy
Policy and
Housing
Policy
HECA Report
Delivery and
reporting
Supporting council Council service
and partner plans
strategies/plans e.g.
financial inclusion
plan.
Our current Environmental Strategy is available on our website:
https://www.norwich.gov.uk/downloads/file/1092/environmental_strategy
Section 5 - Current position in Norwich
Properties and condition of the housing stock
In 2014 the council commissioned the Building Research Establishment Ltd (BRE) to
provide information on key housing and domestic energy variables, with a focus on
private sector housing. The information has been derived from a series of models
which make use of the Experian UK Consumer Dynamics database using a range of
statistical methods. This supersedes the traditional private sector stock condition
survey published in 2006.
The tables below show the years in which Norwich properties were built, both council
stock and privately-owned stock:
Private
Council Stock Total Total
Stock
Pre 1918 48 Pre 1919 14,867
1918 - 1929 519 1919 - 1939 7,740
1930 - 1949 4,703 1940 - 1963 5,371
1950 - 1963 3,969 1964 - 2001 10,426
1964 - 1974 4,017
1975 - 1982 1,607
1983 - 1990 774
1991 - 1997 27
In total, 54,068 properties were built between 1919 and 2001; 15,664 council
dwellings and 38,404 in the private sector. The largest majority of council stock
being built between the 1930’s to the 1970’s, whilst in the private sector 38.7% of
stock was built pre-1919, or before the introduction of cavity walls to housing design.
The 2014 BRE stock modelling highlights the following key facts shown in the maps
and table below:
Condition of Private Stock:
The Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS) identifies 29 potential
housing hazards and their health effects. If a hazard is a serious and immediate risk
to a person’s health and safety, this is known as a Category 1 hazard. If a hazard is
less serious, or less urgent, this is known as a Category 2 hazard.
One of the potential housing hazards has been identified as Excess Cold which
relates to threats to health from cold indoor temperatures. It is known that Excess
Cold can bring about respiratory conditions such as: flu, pneumonia and bronchitis
and cardiovascular conditions such as heart attacks and strokes.
We estimate to have 1,676 private sector dwellings with a Category 1 level of Excess Cold. Or, of the 7,981 private dwellings predicted to have a Category 1 hazard, one fifth of them will have a serious and immediate risk to the tenants’ health due to excess cold. This is borne out by the average Private Sector Standard Assessment Procedure (SAP) rating of 52 across Norwich. SAP ratings and their purpose will be discussed in more detail later in the report. Map 1 (below) highlights the areas of the city where Category 1 hazards have been identified. The darker the colour, the greater the concentration of properties. Map 1 – Category 1 hazards: Map 2 (below) highlights specifically where Category 1 Excess Cold hazards have been identified. The darker the colour, the greater the concentration of dwellings.
Map 2 – Excess cold: We are able to use this data to target cold homes for home energy efficiency improvements and help with heating costs. We have also mapped fuel poverty and excess winter death data for Norwich (Map 3, below), allowing us to identify areas with the highest risk of negative health outcomes due to cold. We have used this to target these areas with appropriate fuel poverty focused advice, including information about our switching service, making sure residents are not trapped on expensive standard tariffs.
Map 3 – Fuel Poverty and Excess Winter Deaths in Norwich The table below shows the energy efficiency rating of the private sector stock across the city. A is the most energy efficient category, with G being the least energy efficient. 13.7% of private sector properties are F&G rated. To set some context, in England 4% of properties are rated as EPC F&G 1 (across all tenures). Energy Efficiency Rating (Based on SAP) private sector stock Source: BRE Stock modelling data (2014) 1 DCLG: Energy Efficiency of buildings certificates in England and Wales: 2008 to December 2016 (2019)
Council stock:
The council stock consists of approximately 15,000 dwellings.
In December 2010 the council’s housing stock achieved the decent homes standard
and we have continued to build on this good work developing the ‘Norwich
Standard’. The Norwich Standard is a commitment to ensure that no individual
component goes beyond its life expectancy, for example, no kitchen will be older
than 20 years, no bathroom older than 30 years and no boiler older than 15 years.
Currently 98% of our properties meet this standard.
The average SAP rating across council housing stock is 70.3. This equates to an
Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) rating of C.
To set some context, in 2017 the average SAP rating across 22.5 million English
dwellings, regardless of tenure, was 62 points, or an EPC rating of D. This was an
improvement on the 1996 figure of 45 points, or an E rating. However, the increase
appears to be slowing – with no change in the average SAP rating between 2016
and 2017 2. From this we can see that whilst Norwich’s private sector housing SAP
rating (52) is lower than the national average SAP rating (62), the SAP rating for
council stock (70.3) is significantly higher.
2
DCLG: English Housing Survey Headline Report (2019)Section 6 - CO2 emissions from across the city
The national picture 3:
UK primary energy consumption increased from 1970 to a peak in 2001. Since then
levels have decreased by 19%. This is thought to be due to a number of factors,
including (at a national level) the decrease in ‘dirty energy’ from coal and petroleum
going into the national electricity grid and the increase in ‘clean energy’ such as
renewable technologies. In addition wage stagnation more generally has contributed
to a need to reduce energy consumption.
In 2017 domestic energy consumption made up 28% of the total UK energy
requirement. Since 1970 the number of UK households has increased by 49% from
18.8 million to 28.0 million households, however domestic energy consumption has
only increased by 8.8% over the same period.
Heating is the main energy requirement of most UK homes. Gas is the dominant
fuel used in the domestic sector. In 2016, 80 per cent of energy use in homes was
required for space and water heating. However, this means that domestic gas
consumption figures are profoundly influenced by the outside temperature.
The local picture:
Table 1 and Graph 1 both show that between 2005 and 2016 the population of
Norwich increased each year, in total by an additional 14,300 residents over the 11
year period.
The per capita emissions dropped consistently and then levelled out in 2010,
followed by a significant drop in 2011, a rise in 2012, then a continued decrease.
From 2014 to 2016 we have seen another significant decrease in industrial
emissions (50% since 2005), while domestic emissions have decreased by 35%
since 2005. The Transport sector by comparison continues to be relatively stable
with a steady decrease of 11% over the period.
These trends reflect the volatile nature of the energy required for space heating. The
domestic and industrial sectors require energy for heating living and business
spaces and both were obviously influenced by the significant cold snap in 2010,
shown by the noticeable peak in carbon dioxide emissions in this year.
The peaks observed in 2010 and 2012 are due to an especially cold and extended
winter in 2010 (average of 8 degree Celsius per day) and a warmer than expected
2011 (average 9.6 degree Celsius per day), followed by a typical 2012 (average of
8.8 degree Celsius per day).
3
DBEIS: Energy consumption in the UK (2018).2013 was also very close to the average (8.8 degree Celsius per day), followed by
2014, which was the hottest UK year on record at the time (average 9.9 degree
Celsius per day), reflected in the sharp drop in carbon emissions that year, at least in
part due to less energy being required for heating purposes both in the Industrial and
Domestic sectors. 2015 (average 9.2 Celsius per day) and 2016 (average 9.3
Celsius per day) both saw a mild winter, which may help explain why emissions
continued to fall 4.
Table 1: Norwich carbon dioxide emissions 2005-2016
Industry & Commercial
Per Capita Emissions (t)
Transport Total
Domestic Total
('000s, mid-year
Grand Total
Population
estimate)
LA
Total
Region Year
Name
2005 427.5 287.1 148.2 866.2 125.6 6.9
2006 436.5 286.5 146.7 873.1 126.8 6.9
2007 399.1 275.8 147.5 825.7 126.9 6.5
2008 383.9 271.7 141.9 800.7 128 6.3
2009 339 247 138.3 727.5 129.2 5.6
Norwich
2010 348 266.2 136.7 754 130.9 5.8
2011 299.6 233.4 132.7 668.8 132.2 5.1
2012 336.5 249.2 129 717.6 133.9 5.4
2013 324.8 243.1 128.7 699.5 135.1 5.2
2014 275 203.5 131.2 612.5 136.6 4.5
2015 258.7 200.9 132.4 594.8 138.1 4.3
2016 213.4 188.9 132.3 537.3 139.9 3.8
Source: DECC: UK local authority and regional carbon dioxide emissions national statistics: 2005-
2016 (June 2018)
4
Met Office: UK Weather Summaries (2018)Graph 1: Norwich carbon dioxide emissions against population size
Norwich carbon dioxide emissions against
population size
500
450
400
350
Industry and
300 Commercial Total
Domestic Total
ktCO2
250
200 Transport Total
150 Population ('000s,
mid-year estimate)
100
50
0
200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016
Source: DECC: UK local authority and regional carbon dioxide emissions national statistics: 2005-
2016 (June 2018)
Between 2005 and 2016 Norwich reduced its carbon dioxide emissions by 45%
(taken across all 3 sectors), whilst experiencing an increase in its population of 11%.
Graph 2 (below) shows Norwich’s per capita carbon dioxide emissions between
2005 and 2016 were considerably lower than those at both a county and a national
level. Local, regional and national levels largely follow the same peaks and troughs
associated with a cold period in 2010, a warm 2011 and an even warmer 2014. The
overall trend is a significant reduction with Norwich dropping from 6.9 tonnes per
capita of CO2 in 2005 to 3.8 tonnes per capita 11 years later.
The figures for tonnes of CO2 produced by sector vary too widely at a local, regional
and national level to be able to present them graphically in a meaningful way. Only
the per capita emissions are directly comparable. This is shown in Graph 2, below.Graph 2: Per capita carbon dioxide emissions – local, regional, and national
Per capita CO2 emissions - locally, regionally,
nationally
10
9
Per capita CO2 emissions (tonnes)
8
7
6
Norwich
5
Norfolk
4
National
3
2
1
0
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Source: DECC: UK local authority and regional carbon dioxide emissions national statistics: 2005-
2016 (June 2018)
It is possible to compare Norwich with its nearest neighbouring local authorities, as in
shown in Graph 3, below. Again, broadly similar pattern of peaks and troughs are
seen for all Norfolk local authorities.Graph 3: Domestic carbon dioxide emissions in Norfolk
Domestic CO2 emissions across Norfolk local
authorities
450
400 Breckland
350 Broadland
300 Great Yarmouth
E mission s- ktCO2
250 Kings Lynn & West
Norfolk
North Norfolk
200
Norwich
150
South Norfolk
100
50
0
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Source: DECC: UK local authority and regional carbon dioxide emissions national statistics: 2005-
2016 (June 2018)
Carbon dioxide emissions have fallen across the county over the period 2005-2016,
with a rise in 2010 due to extended periods of cold weather and snow. The Norwich
local authority area created the lowest level of carbon dioxide emissions, behind
Great Yarmouth. This is thought in part to be due to the city being well connected to
the national gas grid for mains heating when compared to more rural areas which
rely on more carbon dirty forms of energy such as coal or oil. This graph represents
all energy types.
Domestic energy use:
The following graphs (4-7) show the trends in electricity and gas use in Norwich as
compared to the national average. Both the national average and Norwich figures
show an overall decrease in gas and electricity consumption over the 11 year period
to 2016, with Norwich average domestic electricity consumption being significantly
lower than the national average.Domestic electricity use in Norwich:
Graph 4: Average domestic electricity use (kWh) – local and national
Average domestic electricity consumption
(kWh) - 2005 to 2016
5,000
4,500
Electricity consumption (kWh)
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500 Norwich
2,000 England
1,500
1,000
500
0
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Source: DBEIS: Regional and local authority electricity consumption statistics: 2005 to 2016 (2018)
At a regional level, compared with neighbouring Norfolk local authorities average
electricity use is by far the lowest in the county. This is likely due to the larger
number of off-gas homes in other local authority areas, who rely on electric heating
and solid fuels for heating.
Graph 5: Norfolk – average domestic electricity use (kWh) across Norfolk
Norfolk local authority areas - average
domestic electricity consumption (kWh)
6,000
5,000
Electric consumption (kWh)
Norwich
4,000
Breckland
Broadland
3,000
Great Yarmouth
2,000 Kings Lynn
North Norfolk
1,000 South Norfolk
0
Source: DBEIS: Regional and local authority electricity consumption statistics: 2005 to 2016 (2018)Domestic gas use in Norwich:
Graph 6 shows gas consumption in Norwich and again shows a similar trend to
domestic electricity use in the city, that of significant reduction over the 10 year
period. Of particular interest is the large difference between domestic gas
consumption in Norwich and the national level gas consumption. This could be due
to a range of factors including; household income levels, energy efficiency of housing
and how many hours a day homes are occupied for.
Graph 6: Average domestic gas use (kWh) – local and national
Average domestic gas consumption (kWh) -
2005 to 2016
20,000
18,000
16,000
Gas consumption (kWh)
14,000
12,000
10,000 Norwich
8,000 England
6,000
4,000
2,000
0
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Source: DBEIS: Regional and local authority gas consumption statistics: 2005 to 2016 (2018)
Graph 7 shows how Norwich compares at a regional level. Norwich is by far the
largest consumer of domestic gas in Norfolk. However, this is most likely to be
because there are large parts of Norfolk which remain ‘off-gas’ and are reliant on
other forms of domestic energy such as oil fired central heating. This is likely to play
a part in the higher electricity consumption seen across the rest of the county as
some households who are ‘off-gas’ will use electric heating as an alternative.Graph 7: Average domestic gas use (kWh) in Norfolk
Domestic gas consumption across Norfolk local
authorities (GWh)
1,000
900
800
700 Breckland
Gas consumed (GWh)
Broadland
600
Great Yarmouth
500
Kings Lynn
400 North Norfolk
300 Norwich
South Norfolk
200
100
0
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Source: DBEIS: Regional and local authority gas consumption statistics: 2005 to 2016 (2018)
While energy efficiency measures do have a positive impact on reducing gas
consumption, the increase in fuel prices over this period, is also likely to be a factor,
causing more households to reduce the amount time they heat their homes for, even
if this has a negative impact on their health and wellbeing.
Gas consumption falls more sharply at a local level than electricity consumption and
this may reflect the fact that, in the city at least, a majority of homes will be heated
using gas central heating. The decision to ‘heat or eat’ is sadly a reality that many
households facing fuel poverty may have to make.The rising cost of energy:
Graph 8: Norwich electricity consumption vs cost:
Norwich domestic electricity consumption (kWh) vs annual
cost of domestic electricity (£)
4,000 600
3,500
500
3,000
Electricity consumption (kWh)
400
2,500
Average domestic
electricity
Cost (£)
2,000 300 consumption
1,500
200 Annual cost of
1,000 domestic electricity
100
500
0 0
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Source: DBEIS: Regional and local authority electricity consumption statistics: 2005 to 2016 (2018)/
DBEIS: Annual domestic energy bills (2018)
Graph 8, perhaps unsurprisingly, appears to show a close relationship between the
cost of electricity and electricity consumption. Note in 2010 where the cost of
electricity dips for the first time since 2006 electricity consumption increases. And
again in 2012 when electricity prices increase once more consumption drops once
again. This relationship can be seen very strongly in 2017, where a sharp increase in
cost led to a considerable drop in consumption.Graph 9: Norwich gas consumption vs cost of gas:
Norwich domestic gas consumption (kWh) vs annual
cost of domestic gas (£)
18,000 800
16,000 700
14,000 600
Gas consumption (kWh)
12,000 Average domestic
500
gas consumption
10,000
Cost (£)
400 (kWh)
8,000
300 Annual cost of
6,000 domestic gas* (£)
4,000 200
2,000 100
0 0
2005200620072008200920102011201220132014201520162017
Source: DBEIS: Regional and local authority gas consumption statistics: 2005 to 2016 (2018)/ DBEIS:
Annual domestic energy bills (2018)
Graph 9 shows the relationship between domestic gas consumption in Norwich and
the price of gas. The overall trend is for a reduction in gas use, although this drop
slowed in 2009/2010 with the drop in gas prices, and continued until gas prices
reached their peak in 2014, when consumption rose slightly with the drop in gas
prices. Despite the annual cost of domestic gas dropping dramatically since 2014
consumption has stayed fairly flat, with a small increase in 2017. This may suggest
that energy efficiency improvements have meant people need to consume less
regardless of price.
Although it would seem there is a relationship between the two factors, to suggest
that the cost of energy is the only contributing factor to energy consumption would be
to over-simplify the complexity of this situation.
The increases in the levels of home insulation e.g. loft and cavity and solid wall
insulation, will also serve to reduce the amount of energy required to heat domestic
properties. In addition, the number of properties producing their own renewable
energy e.g. from photovoltaic panels will also result in a reduction in the amount of
energy consumed from the national grid. Both the installation of home insulation and
domestic renewables require the ability to be able to afford the investment in these
technologies, which can be considerable. The rate of take up of both home
insulation and renewables will be considered later in this report.Section 7 - Fuel poverty:
Following the recommendations contained in the John Hills report ‘Getting the
Measure of Fuel Poverty’ (March 2012) central government scrapped the 10% fuel
poverty indicator, and the way that fuel poverty is measured was re-defined with the
introduction of the Low Income High Costs (LIHC) indicator.
Under the LIHC indicator a household is considered to be in fuel poverty if they have
required fuel costs which are above the national average (national median level) and
were they to spend that amount, they would be left with a residual income below the
official poverty line.
The current definition of the poverty line, or relative poverty, is defined as 60 per cent
of the median UK household income. If a household’s income is less than 60 per
cent of this average, they are considered to be living in relative poverty. Professor
Peter Townsend, a leading authority on UK poverty, defines relative poverty as when
someone’s “resources are so seriously below those commanded by the average
individual or family that they are, in effect, excluded from ordinary living patterns,
customs and activities”. 5
To put it more broadly, a fuel poor household is one which cannot afford to keep
warm at a reasonable cost.
The government infographic below attempts to explain what fuel poverty is in real
terms under the LIHC indicator.
5
JRF: Reporting Poverty in the UK: a practical guide for journalists 2009Source: DECC: Cutting the cost of keeping warm – a fuel poverty strategy for England (2015)
Graph 10: Estimated number of Fuel Poor households in Norwich
Estimated number of Fuel Poor households in
Norwich (using LIHC indicator)
7804
7490 7272 7124
6523
6146
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Source: DBEIS: 2016 sub-regional fuel poverty data: low income high costs indicator (2018)What does it show? In Norwich fuel poverty has unfortunately increased since the
HECA was previously published, with levels now at 7,804. This mirrors a rise both
nationally and regionally, and is set against a backdrop of rising energy costs.
Graph 11: Estimated number of fuel poor households - nationally
National - estimated number of fuel poor
households
2550565
2502217
2390053 2379357
2346715
2282579
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Source: DBEIS: 2016 sub-regional fuel poverty data: low income high costs indicator (2018)
What does it show? At a national level, following the introduction of the LIHC
indicator in 2012, the number of fuel poor households dropped, but has increased
every year since then to over 2.55 million households.
Graph 12: % of Norfolk households in fuel poverty
Percentage of households in Fuel Poverty
(using LIHC indicator)
14
Norwich
12
Broadland DC
Households in fuel poverty (%)
10
South Norfolk
8
Great Yarmouth
6
North Norfolk
4
Breckland
2
King's Lynn and West
0
Norfolk
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Source: DBEIS: 2016 sub-regional fuel poverty data: low income high costs indicator (2018)What does it show? In 2011 Norwich experienced one of the highest levels of fuel
poverty in the county. Although levels of fuel poverty dropped from 2012-15 we, like
many other local authorities, saw an increase in 2016. The regional increase in 2016
mirrors the national trend.
Norwich City Council have invested considerable resources into supporting those
households in fuel poverty through a range of initiatives including: the Cosy City
scheme supporting residents to utilise Energy Company Obligation (ECO) funding
for home insulation, the Big Switch and Save collective energy switching scheme,
our Warm and Well work both with stakeholders and the public, Home Improvement
team work, work with the Private Sector landlords around category 1 hazards and
ongoing improvements to our housing stock. Fuel poverty is complex and we are not
complacent about the need to continue our work.
Our Affordable Warmth Strategy can be found here:
https://www.norwich.gov.uk/downloads/file/2241/affordable_warmth_strategy
This strategy covers the whole of Norwich and encompasses partnership working
both within Norwich City Council and with external partners. It is delivered as part of
our overall environmental strategy and works to reduce fuel poverty, for example
through increasing home energy efficiency, will also reduce the carbon footprint of
the city.
There are significant pockets of fuel poverty within the city. Graph 13 shows the fuel
poverty figures for the city broken down to ward level.
Graph 13: % of Norwich households in fuel poverty, by ward
Norwich - Percentage of households in
Fuel Poverty by ward
17.5
15.7
14.2 14.6 14.8
11.8 12.3
10.7 11.3 11.3
9.8 9.9
8.8
Source: DBEIS: 2016 sub-regional fuel poverty data: low income high costs indicator (2018)What does it show? These figures are the most recent figures released by central
government and relate to fuel poverty levels in 2016. Fuel poverty levels in the city
vary from ward to ward and the reasons for this are complex. Nelson is the ward
with the highest percentage of households experiencing fuel poverty at 17.5%, whilst
Mancroft experiences the lowest levels at 8.8%.
Measuring fuel poverty is complicated. When gauging fuel poverty levels the
government uses 3 factors:
• household income,
• household energy efficiency and
• fuel prices
This seems quite straightforward, but other factors to consider are:
• How the dwelling is occupied – what is the ‘standard heating regime’ - are the
residents out of the house for much of the day, or are they predominantly
home-based with medical problems.
• How old is the dwelling? Is it a house or a flat, does it have a pitched or flat
roof, does it have a cavity wall?
• Who owns the dwelling – the resident, a private sector landlord or the council?
In order to identify the types of household who are in the most need government has
suggested that the following factors may be involved in identifying those most in
need: a. Low income, b. Old dwelling (pre-1945), c. Larger dwelling, d. Private
rented sector, e. Old/inefficient boiler (or no heating system), f. Non-gas heating6
In addition, within fuel poor households there are those who have increased
vulnerability such as the very old or the very young and those with long term health
conditions. Everyone can be negatively impacted by living in a cold home, but these
vulnerable groups are particularly at risk of the cold exacerbating underlying health
conditions such as respiratory and cardiovascular problems. It has been recognised
that children who are “living in cold homes are significantly more likely to suffer from
chest problems, asthma and bronchitis” 7. Cold homes can slow down recovery
following discharge from hospital, when people are already at risk, and can lead to
repeat admissions due to unsuitable housing. It has been estimated that housing-
related ill health costs the NHS £2.5bn per year 8.
The following graphs (14-19) attempt to consider various factors which may
contribute to fuel poverty levels in a ward. Firstly, median household income. This is
the mid-point income figure for all the households’ incomes within a ward.
6
DECC: Fuel Poverty – a framework for future action (2013)
7
DECC: Fuel Poverty – a framework for future action (2013)
8
Public Health England: Local action on health inequalities – fuel poverty and cold home-related
health problems (2014)Graph 14: % of households in fuel poverty vs household income
Percentage of households in fuel poverty against
Median Household Income
20 40,000
18
35,000
16
Households in fuel poverty (%)
Median Household Income (£)
30,000 Percentage of
14 households in
25,000 Fuel Poverty
12
10 20,000
8 Median
15,000
Household
6
10,000 Income
4
5,000
2
0 0
Ward
Source: DBEIS: 2014 sub-regional fuel poverty data: low income high costs indicator (2016)/ CACI
Paycheck data (2016)
What does it show? This data shows that Nelson and Eaton have the highest
median household income, despite Nelson ward having the highest amounts of fuel
poverty in the city. Therefore we must turn to the other factors in determining fuel
poverty.
Another measure to consider is the Standard Assessment Procedure (SAP) rating.
The SAP works by assessing how much energy a dwelling will consume, when
delivering a defined level of comfort and service provision. The assessment is based
on standardised assumptions for occupancy and behaviour. This enables a like-for-
like comparison of dwelling performance. Related factors, such as fuel costs and
emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2), can be determined from the assessment.This
gives an indicator of the energy efficiency of a property. Following assessment a
SAP calculation is given from 1 to 100+ for the annual energy cost. The higher the
score the lower the energy running costs, with 100 representing zero energy cost.
Dwellings with a rating in excess of 100 are net exporters of energy.
The energy efficiency of housing is measured using a SAP rating and when houses
are sold they are awarded an Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) rating. Table 2
(below) shows how these two property energy efficiency ratings compare.Table 2: EPC and SAP ratings – a comparison
SAP rating
EPC band
Points
92-100 SAP
A points (Most
efficient)
81-91 SAP
B
points
69-80 SAP
C
points
55-68 SAP
D
points
39-54 SAP
E
points
21-38 SAP
F
points
1-20 SAP
points
G
(Least
efficient)
Graph 15 shows the percentage of fuel poor households against the average SAP
rating in each ward across all tenures: owner occupied, private rented and social
housing.
Graph 15: % of households in fuel poverty vs SAP ratings
Percentage of households in fuel poverty
20
against average SAP rating (all tenures)
70
by
18 ward
60 60
57 58
Households in fuel poverty (%)
16 56 55 55
52 53 52 52
14 51 50 Percentage of
49
45 households in fuel
12 poverty
40
10
Average SAP rating
30
8 (all tenures)
6 20
4
10
2
0 0
Source: DBEIS: 2016 sub-regional fuel poverty data: low income high costs indicator (2018)/BRE
Stock Condition Survey (2014)What does it show? Generally speaking, Graph 15 shows that as the SAP rating decreases that the percentage of households in fuel poverty increases. However, this is across all tenure types. SAP ratings vary widely across tenure type. Historically SAP ratings have been lower in the private rented sector. Figures suggest that at a national level 19% of private rented properties are in fuel poverty compared to 7.7% in the owner occupied category 9. Fuel poverty is the highest in the private rented sector. With housing costs continuing to rise and wages not keeping pace the private rented sector looks set to continue to grow. There are now 4.5 million households in the private rented sector, which has doubled in size since 2002 10. Fuel poor households privately renting a G EPC rated home would need, on average, to spend over £1,200 more on energy to heat their homes properly, and those renting EPC band F homes would need to spend over £700 more. This compares to less than £370 for those in bands E and above 11. Since April 2018 there has been a requirement for any properties rented out in the private rented sector to achieve a minimum energy performance rating of E on an Energy Performance Certificate (EPC). The regulations are currently in force for new lets and renewals of tenancies only, and will come into effect for all existing tenancies on 1st April 2020. It is unlawful to rent a property which breaches the requirement for a minimum E rating, unless there is an applicable exemption. A civil penalty of up to £4,000 will be imposed for breaches. This should have the effect of raising the energy efficiency of these properties and so helping to lower fuel poverty in the Private Rented Sector. In 2014 2171 (or 16%) of Norwich houses had an F and G band EPC rating. Therefore the forthcoming legislation could have the potential to have a beneficial effect on many cold households. However, when the legislation was written it was expected that the Green Deal would be a tool to ensure that landlords were not faced with high upfront expenses and that through the Green Deal tenants would pay for the cost of energy efficiency installations through their energy bills. Now that the Green Deal has been scrapped, and ECO funding decreased, the rented sector awaits an update on what impact this will have on the implementation of this legislation. As well as this landlords whose costs exceed £3,500 will be exempt from this legislation, despite recommendations from fuel poverty groups for the cap to be set at £5,000. This means some of the worst performing households are unlikely to see the level of investment required to improve their energy efficiency, and may still continue to suffer from the negative consequences of cold. Norwich City Council is aware of these minimum efficiency standards, and our private sector housing team leads on enforcement. We provide general guidance about our standard on our website. We are developing our approach to enforcement and expect to take an intelligence-led approach to targeting in the future. We will very probably use EPC ratings, along with other indicators, to help us do this. 9 BEIS: Fuel Poverty detailed tables (2018) 10 DCLG: English Housing Survey headline report (2019) 11 DECC: Private Rented Sector Energy Efficiency Regulations (Domestic) (England and Wales) (2014)
Currently, however, we do not directly target landlord with lower rated properties.
This is because the team is very small and is mostly dealing reactively to complaints
or to the requirements of the HMO licensing scheme.
Graph 16: % of households in fuel poverty vs % private rental properties
Percentage of households in fuel poverty against percentage of
privately rented properties by ward
20 45
18 40
Privately rented dwellings (%)
16 35
Houses in fuel poverty (%)
14
30
12
25
10
20
8 Fuel Poverty
15
6 Private Stock
4 10
2 5
0 0
Source: DBEIS: 2016 sub-regional fuel poverty data: low income high costs indicator (2018)/ BRE
Stock Condition Survey (2014)
What does it show? Graph 16 (above) shows the percentage of households in fuel
poverty against the percentage of privately rented properties by ward. There is no
unequivocal relationship across all wards.
Norwich is a university town and as such has a disproportionately high number of
Houses of Multiple Occupation (HMO’s) which are often in the private rented sector,
with rooms being let out on an individual basis. The graph below shows the
percentage of households in fuel poverty against the number of HMO’s in that ward.Graph 17: % of households in fuel poverty vs number of HMO properties
Percentage of households in fuel poverty against number of
HMO's by ward
20 900
18 800
Households in fuel poverty (%)
16 700
14 Percentage of
600 households in Fuel
12 Poverty
500
10
400
8
300 Number of HMOs
6
4 200
2 100
0 0
Source: DBEIS: 2016 sub-regional fuel poverty data: low income high costs indicator (2018)/ BRE
Stock Condition Survey (2014)
What does it show? As with the previous graph, Graph 17 shows no unequivocal
relationship between HMO’s and fuel poverty at a ward level. It is however
interesting to note that the highest levels of HMO’s fall in Nelson wards where the
highest percentage of fuel poor households lie.
Finally, Norwich City Council has retained its housing stock of approximately 15,000
properties. Local Authorities are required to maintain their properties to a good living
standard and as such the average SAP rating across the council housing stock is
high at 70.3, or a mid-range C EPC rating. These higher levels of energy efficiency
will be helpful in staving off fuel poverty amongst some of the most vulnerable of the
city’s residents, particularly those on a low income. The graph below shows fuel
poverty against levels of council housing stock at a ward level.Graph 18: % households in fuel poverty vs council stock levels
Percentage of households in fuel poverty against
50.0
percentage of dwellings that are council stock
20
by ward
45.0 18
40.0 16
Households in fuel poverty (%)
Percentage of
35.0 14 total
dwellings that
30.0 12 are council
stock
25.0 10
Percentage of
20.0 8 households in
fuel poverty
15.0 6
10.0 4
5.0 2
0.0 0
Source: DBEIS: 2016 sub-regional fuel poverty data: low income high costs indicator (2018)/ BRE
Stock Condition Survey (2014)
What does it show? The highest levels of council stock dwellings fall in Lakenham
and Mile Cross wards where some of the lowest median levels of income are
experienced. This is not surprising given the purpose of the council stock to support
some of the most vulnerable residents. Equally the lowest levels of council stock are
found in Eaton and Nelson wards, which experience the highest median level of
income in the city.
The data would suggest that the high SAP ratings experienced in council owned
properties is in fact supporting areas of low income which might be forced into fuel
poverty if the fabric of their homes was not of such a high standard. Where there are
low council stock levels the resulting fuel poverty is quite stark, despite higher
income levels.
We believe that the data supports the council’s decision to retain our housing stock
at a time when many other local authorities chose not to. The average SAP rating of
Norwich’s 15,000+ council homes is 70.3 which is significantly higher than the
private sector at 52. Without the decision to retain this important social asset we
believe that the number of homes experiencing fuel poverty in Norwich would be
considerably increased.
Fuel poverty is a shifting picture and should be considered over time. Graph 19
(below) shows fuel poverty across all wards since 2011.Graph 19: % of Norwich households in Fuel Poverty over time (LIHC indicator):
Percentage of Norwich households in fuel poverty
30
over time
25
Households in Fuel Poverty (%)
20
2011
2012
15
2013
10 2014
2015
5 2016
England (2016)
0
Source: DBEIS: 2018 sub-regional fuel poverty data
What does it show? The graph above shows the fuel poverty picture across the
city since 2011. 6 out of 13 wards are below the England national average for fuel
poverty. Interestingly, although Nelson ward still has the highest level of fuel poverty
in the city it is the only ward to register a decrease in fuel poverty from 2015-16. This
may be due to ongoing efforts by the council to target this ward. We are not
complacent and we will continue to work to try to understand the individual fuel
poverty picture in each ward, the factors that contribute to that picture and how we
can best work to alleviate fuel poverty wherever we can.
At a national level the government is projecting a decrease in fuel poverty for 2017
and 2018 12, and we will need to wait to see how this plays out in Norwich. In the
meantime we continue to work to reduce fuel poverty at every opportunity.
The graphs contained in this section are an overview of some of the factors which
can influence whether a ward is in fuel poverty or not. Fuel Poverty is a complex
problem and there is no single simple solution or quick fix.
The next section of this report give further details of the initiatives we have
implemented to date to help lower energy costs, increase energy efficiency and
support those most in need, including the fuel poor.
12
DBEIS: Annual Fuel Poverty Statistics report – England (2018)Section 8 – Council initiatives – what are we doing?
Energy efficiency measures:
As well as the effect of rising energy prices, some of the drop in domestic energy use
can be attributed to an increase in energy efficiency in properties. In particular
Norwich City Council has been working to install loft and cavity wall insulation across
Norwich.
Loft insulation has historically been a more popular measure in Norwich, than cavity
wall insulation, which may be indicative of the large number of Victorian terraces,
built before cavity walls became popular in the UK. Therefore, not all properties in
Norwich have cavity walls. Cavity wall insulation also requires specialist equipment
to install, so unlike Loft Insulation, is not a job for the diy-er. However, take up of loft
insulation can also be impeded due to residents storing belongings in their loft
space, which restricts the necessary access.
Within the private sector a significant proportion of properties are rental properties,
which can restrict the take-up of home improvement measures since the landlord
may be reluctant to pay to improve the thermal efficiency of the property when they
will not benefit directly from a decrease in fuel bills, paid by their tenant.
Graph 20: Norwich - loft insulation under CERT funding:
Norwich - loft insulation
installations under CERT funding
6,000
5,000 5,452
4,000
3,984
3,000
2,000 2,531
1,729
1,000
897
0
2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13
Source: DECC: Interactive mapsGraph 21: Norwich - cavity wall insulation under CERT funding:
Norwich - cavity wall installations
under CERT funding
3,000
2,500
2,591
2,000
1,992
1,500
1,427
1,000
1,000
500
586
0
2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13
Source: DECC: Interactive maps
In 2013 CERT/CESP funding was scrapped and replaced with the Green Deal and
Energy Company Obligation (ECO) funding. The Green Deal was a loan against the
property which paid back directly from the savings made on energy bills. In principle
it seemed advantageous to home owners who could not afford the initial up front
capital to undertake energy efficiency works. However, in reality, loan rates were
relatively high for homeowners when compared to the cost of mortgage-related
borrowing and the Green Deal scheme has also been scrapped.
In April 2013 the Energy Company Obligation (ECO) was launched. This is a
scheme which energy companies pay into and is used to improve households’
energy efficiency. The first iteration of ECO funding had three elements to it; CSCO,
CERO and HHCRO funded installations. Loosely speaking, the three elements
funded different types of installations – HHRCO replacement boilers in privately
owned households; CERO loft Insulation and cavity wall insulation in privately owned
properties and CSCO solid wall, cavity wall and loft Insulation on social housing.
ECO2 (April 2015 – September 2018) then followed. This focused more on fuel
poverty with HHCRO increasing from 36% of the funding to 70% and CSCO no
longer being available. ECO2 introduced the ‘flexible eligibility’ mechanism, which
allowed local authorities to determine eligible homes, representing up to 10% of
suppliers Affordable Warmth Obligations. However, ECO2 saw the funding be
reduced to £620 million per annum from £840 million per annum.
Our statement of intent, which allows the criteria for flexible eligibility, can be found
here: https://www.norwich.gov.uk/downloads/file/3974/eco_flexible_eligibility_-
_statement_of_intentECO3, the current iteration, was launched in autumn 2018. The scheme now
focuses entirely on Affordable Warmth rather than carbon savings, with the CERO
funding also being removed. The local authority flexible eligibility component has
been increased to 25%. Although the majority of previous ECO works in Norwich has
come from the CERO commitment we are hopeful that the increase in LA flex will
allow us to deliver continued ECO works in the city.
Norwich City Council employs a dedicated Affordable Warmth Officer who is able to
act as a lynch-pin between residents in fuel poverty and accessing the relevant
funding for dependent on their needs and situation. The Affordable Warmth Officer
works closely with the Private Sector Housing team and in particular the Home
Improvement team, sharing information and providing assistance to vulnerable
residents.
Chart 1 (below) shows the figures to date for these types of installations fitted in
Norwich.
Chart 1: Post CERT funding – energy efficiency measures installed:
Affordable
Warmth
(HHCRO), 622
Carbon Saving
Trust (CERO),
1,382
Carbon Savings
Community
(CSCO), 918
Source: DBEIS Household energy efficiency national statistics headline release (June 2018)
To date the majority of the ECO funding utilised has been from the CERO fund,
predominantly funding loft and cavity wall insulation. This is the cheapest type of
insulation and easiest to access. Therefore changes to ECO3, such as removal of
the CERO obligation, may have an adverse effect on delivery. We will continue to
monitor this and promote ECO funding to residents of Norwich.Graph 22: Take up of ECO measures in Norwich North and Norwich South:
Number of ECO measures installed in both
Norwich Parliamentary constituencies (June
2018)
Norwich North Norwich South
1,883
1,001
632 685
289 369
Carbon Saving Target (CERO) Carbon Savings Community (CSCO) Affordable Warmth (HHCRO)
Source: BEIS: Household Energy Efficiency National Statistics, detailed HEE tables (December 2018)
Graph 22 (above) shows that take-up of CERO funding has been far greater in the
Norwich North as compared to Norwich South, whereas CSCO funding has been
more predominant in Norwich South.
Graph 23: Take up of ECO measures across Norfolk
Number of ECO measures installed across
Norfolk
Affordable Warmth (HHCRO) Carbon Savings Community (CSCO) Carbon Saving Trust (CERO)
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
Norwich Broadland Breckland Great South Norfolk North Norfolk Kings Lynn
Yarmouth and West
Norfolk
Source: BEIS: Household Energy Efficiency National Statistics, detailed HEE tables (December 2018)
Graph 23 (above) compares measures installed across the region. As you can see
Norwich has some of the highest levels of CSCO installations in the county. This is
probably due to the high occurrence of terraced housing in Norwich.However, the rest of the county sees, on the whole, a higher take up of the CERO commitment than Norwich. As such, the impact of the CERO removal may impact local authorities across the county. This discrepancy may be because Norwich has a higher social housing stock, and therefore funding was split across these tenures, whereas other local authorities in Norfolk have very low social housing stock and so have focused on the private sector. Norwich’s Cosy City project: The Cosy City Project: Cosy City is Norwich City Councils project to deliver ECO measures, in partnership with Aran Services Ltd, focusing particularly on cavity wall and loft insulation. This scheme works to improve energy efficiency, and reduce carbon emissions, across Norwich. We have used benefit data to send (anonymised) letters advising residents that they may be eligible for ECO measures, through the Cosy City scheme. Measures delivered via Cosy City project: GDAR and EPC assessments 350 SWI 68 Boiler replacements 72 Cavity wall and Loft insulation 220 Heating Upgrades 9 Boiler repairs 8 Small insulation measures 297 Total 1024
There is a high level of pre-1920’s housing in Norwich with many rows of red-brick Victorian terraced houses. Unfortunately housing of this age does not have a cavity wall and the only way to provide effective insulation is via Solid Wall Insulation (SWI). SWI is an expensive means of insulating a property when compared to loft and cavity wall insulation and requires a specialist contractor. As part of the Cosy City project we helped to fund 67 properties to install SWI, providing grants of £5,800 towards the cost. Cosy City has provided help to 89 residents to access funding for boiler replacements, repairs and heating upgrades. The majority of these residents are amongst the most fuel poor and vulnerable residents in Norwich. Cosy City has also provided help to insulate lofts and cavity walls in over 200 properties. Over time we hope to see SAP rating improvements within the private housing sector but we are aware that domestic energy efficiency funding is limited, with the removal of the Green Deal Finance Company and the Green Deal Home Improvement Fund and the reduction in ECO funding. We will still continue to help residents access available funding and work to increase SAP ratings across the city. Warm and Well: The Norwich Tradesmen’s Benevolent Fund is a small pot of funding which the council has been fortunate to have been awarded in recent years. The funding has been used to help the most vulnerable Norwich residents to weather the cold winter months. It is used for urgent heating need, winter packs and repairing heating breakdowns. Combined with the switch and save revenue it has helped many residents in desperate heating need. Our warm and well packs include thermal clothes, blankets and soup. Example Warm and Well pack The fund is also used to provide small energy efficiency measures such as draught proofing and radiator foil, which help reduce the resident’s fuel bills by 5%. In 2017/18 we provided these small measures, and warm and well packs, to over 200 residents. We also provide emergency heating in the form of radiator loans to residents without central heating.
We work to help residents access appropriate funding for their heating repairs including grants to prevent admission to hospital due to cold homes and home improvement loans, however these are subject to availability and eligibility. Advice and Support: In addition to the above projects the council continues to support residents with fuel poverty advice. This includes the annual Winter Wellbeing event that brings together affordable warmth groups to promote their services to stakeholders. Warm and Well stakeholder event 2016 Our Affordable Warmth Officer advises residents on how to save energy within the homes, including benefit advice and trust funds for fuel debt, as well as supporting any dispute the resident has with a supplier. We work with residents to reduce fuel debts. We also work with teams within the council, including specialist support and private sector housing, to provide 1:1 support where appropriate. We communicate this advice in a variety of ways, including energy saving packs with information on reducing fuel bills, face to face advice and targeted letter campaigns. These packs have been sent out directly to residents in our most fuel poor wards, and are given to residents when we undertake roadshows. All of our tools, schemes and support are coordinated by our Affordable Warmth Officer. Big Switch and Save:
You can also read
